CTPP March 2001

ctpp@listserv.transportation.org

6 participants
8 discussions

by ed christopher

i believe next spring is the target. after the review of the criteria posted today, census will go back and do its thing. FHWA put a memo out on this that can be found at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/c2000mem.htm it begins to answer some of the "what if i am a new mpo" questions. Cliff Davidson wrote: > Ed, as a small MPO expecting an expanded urbanized area, our local governments are very interested in "when" the urbanized area boundaries will be designated. Do you have a target date for Colorado on your radar screens yet? > > Thanks for keeping us current on CTPP and Census matters. We sincerely appreciate the updates. > > Cliff Davidson, Director > Mesa County Regional Transportation Planning Office > P.O. Box 20,000-5093 > Grand Junction, CO 81502-5093 > (970) 255-7188 > (970) 244-1769 (FAX) > > >>> ed christopher <berwyned(a)mcs.com> 03/28 11:22 AM >>> > Today the Census Bureau published the criteria it plans on using to > describe urbanized area boundaries. There is a text version and PDF > online. The PDF version has some graphics that are not in the text. > Below is the URL for the PDF. I have also included the short URL to the > NARA site incase the long link doesn't work. I am sure once we have had > a chance to wade through this there will be some discussion. By the way, > comments are due by April 27, 2001 > > http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/frwebgate.access.gpo.… > > http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/index.html#top > > -- > Ed Christopher > Bureau of Transportation Statistics > U.S. Department of Transportation > 400 Seventh Street SW > Washington DC 20590 > 202-366-0412

24 years, 4 months

[CTPP] Urbanized Area Boundaries

by ed christopher

Today the Census Bureau published the criteria it plans on using to describe urbanized area boundaries. There is a text version and PDF online. The PDF version has some graphics that are not in the text. Below is the URL for the PDF. I have also included the short URL to the NARA site incase the long link doesn't work. I am sure once we have had a chance to wade through this there will be some discussion. By the way, comments are due by April 27, 2001 http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/14mar20010800/frwebgate.access.gpo.… http://www.nara.gov/fedreg/index.html#top -- Ed Christopher Bureau of Transportation Statistics U.S. Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street SW Washington DC 20590 202-366-0412

24 years, 4 months

[CTPP] Revised SAS Program.

by Michael Stover

Attached please find a SAS program that originated from census.gov/redistricting but was revised to be more user friendly. Many thanks to the Census Bureau for putting the shell up on the web. SAS users may find this version more functional, i.e. variable names with meaning and numeric variable formats. This works for Kansas but may be easily modified for any state. The drop statements may need to be revised for your SAS application. The file was created with KeditW v1.5. Enjoy! Michael Stover Research Team The Planning Commission Tampa, FL > <<KS all 3.sas>> >

24 years, 4 months

[CTPP] Census 2000 Initiative News Alert (long post)

by ed christopher

From: Census2000 <Census2000(a)ccmc.org> Commerce Secretary Chooses Unadjusted Census Data After Census Bureau Recommends Against Statistical Correction Expert Panel Cites Lack of Time To Complete Analysis; Confirms Net and Differential Undercounts in Census 2000 Plus: Reaction from Members of Congress and Stakeholders; Los Angeles Pursues Court Challenge to 'No Adjustment' Decision. Relying on advice from a Census Bureau committee established last fall under a federal rule issued by his predecessor, Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans last week decided to release unadjusted census population counts to the states for "the purpose and only the purpose of redistricting." The Secretary said in his March 6th announcement that he followed an "open, reasonable and fair" process and "took full account of the views of experts." On March 1, a committee of twelve senior Census Bureau professionals recommended the release of unadjusted census numbers to the states for redistricting purposes. Acting Census Bureau Director William Barron Jr., who as the agency's Deputy Director also serves on the Executive Steering Committee for A.C.E. Policy (ESCAP), transmitted the recommendation, in which he concurred, and accompanying report to Secretary of Commerce Donald Evans. In accepting the report's findings, the Secretary called the recommendation "correct and prudent." He also praised the Bureau's staff, saying, "You set ambitious goals and you exceeded them." "We have achieved a quality count," Secretary Evans said, calling Census 2000 "the most accurate census ever," with "the lowest undercount [and] the smallest differentials in history by far." Based on the results of its Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation (A.C.E.) survey, the Census Bureau reported a net national undercount of 1.2 percent, or 3.3 million people. It has not yet reported the total numbers of people missed (omissions) and counted twice or wrongly included (erroneous enumerations), which offset each other to calculate the net national undercount. The net undercount in 1990, measured by a similar though smaller quality-check survey, was 1.6 percent, or 4 million people. The Bureau reported an undercount of 1.2 percent, or 2.8 million people, in the 1980 census, based on its independent demographic estimate of the population. In its recommendation, the ESCAP concluded that "there is considerable evidence to support the use of adjusted data, and that Census 2000 and A.C.E. operations were well designed and conducted." However, the committee said it was "unable to conclude, based on the information available at this time, that the adjusted Census 2000 data are more accurate for redistricting." Further research, the panel said, is "likely" to show that "adjustment based on the A.C.E. would result in improved accuracy," and to confirm that Census 2000 reduced but did not eliminate a net national undercount and a "differential" undercount of minorities, renters, and children. Dr. Barron noted in his memorandum of transmittal that the "primary reason" for the conclusion is the "apparent inconsistency in population growth over the decade as estimated by the A.C.E. and demographic analysis." The committee could not explain the differences, which "raise[s] the possibility of an unidentified error in the A.C.E. estimate or Census 2000," in the time available, he said. The demographic analysis figures are "significantly lower" than the population as measured by the A.C.E. survey, the committee said. A.C.E. is the Accuracy and Coverage Evaluation program, which included a quality-check survey of 314,000 households designed to measure under- and overcounts in the census. Demographic analysis is an independent estimate of the nation's population the Bureau produces based primarily on birth, death, immigration, emigration, and Medicare records. The ESCAP described the results of "quality measures" designed to evaluate the relative accuracy of the adjusted and unadjusted numbers. It concluded that while "the adjusted data are more accurate overall," it had concerns that merited further research, including a possibility that the unadjusted data for counties with populations below 100,000 were more accurate. The ESCAP report and recommendation are posted on the Census Bureau's web site at www.census.gov/dmd/www/escapreport.html. Responding to questions from reporters at his March 6 press conference, Secretary Evans said he was not sure whether he would release the statistically adjusted numbers in the future, which might be used as the basis for distributing federal program funds. Acting Director Barron, who joined Mr. Evans in announcing the decision, said the Bureau would have more information in six months from a supplemental census survey fielded last summer as part of the American Community Survey development, to help resolve the discrepancy between the Demographic Analysis and A.C.E. estimates. Reaction from Congress and stakeholder organizations: Members of Congress with oversight responsibility for the census, the Census Monitoring Board, and organizations involved in promoting an accurate census reacted quickly to the ESCAP's findings and the Commerce Secretary's final decision not to release statistically adjusted numbers for redistricting. Rep. Dan Miller (R-FL), chairman of the House Subcommittee on the Census, "applaud[ed]" the Secretary's decision to release unadjusted numbers, saying the "scientific hurdle of using sampling to improve the accuracy of the census could not be met." The previous week, Rep. Miller praised the ESCAP for "not [bending] to tremendous political pressure to wrongly adjust the census. The Supreme Court "found sampling illegal," the chairman said, the public "proved you can have a great census using only an actual headcount," and the Census Bureau determined "you can't make a great census any better" with scientific methods. "Game. Set. Match." Chairman Miller concluded. "The American people win." Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), a member (and former senior Democrat) of the census oversight subcommittee, said the ESCAP recommendation meant "millions of Americans had the clock run out on them." She called on the Commerce Secretary to give the Census Bureau more time to complete its evaluation of Census 2000 and to release the adjusted block level data "for others to evaluate and scrutinize." "It is not enough for the Bureau to tell the country they missed millions," the congresswoman said. "They must design methods in the future which will accurately count every American." House Democratic Leader Richard Gephardt (D-MO), House Democratic Caucus Chair Martin Frost (D-TX), and Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), senior Democrat on the House Government Reform Committee, issued a joint statement urging the Bush Administration "to allow the professionals at the Census Bureau to continue their work without interference." They said "the number of errors in the 2000 census appears to be as high or higher than in 1990," referring to the total number of people missed, counted twice, or otherwise counted incorrectly in the census. Many census stakeholder organizations expressed their disappointment at Secretary Evans' decision and urged him to give the ESCAP more time to determine if an adjusted census based on the A.C.E. results would be more accurate. The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Educational Fund (NALEO) said in a statement that the unadjusted data "does not reflect the undercount of over three million Americans," including more than a million Latinos. NALEO commended the Census Bureau for "conducting a successful Census 2000" and urged the Commerce Secretary to give the agency "time to offer the national the most reliable data available," noting that many states will not start redrawing political boundaries until later in the year. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR) said the civil rights community is "deeply disappointed" by the ESCAP recommendation and called on the Bureau to release the adjusted data "for a full accounting" of the census process. Noting the Census Bureau's ten year effort to address the problem of undercounting, LCCR Executive Director Wade Henderson said, "[T]his is a dark day in the nation's continued pursuit of equal opportunity and social justice for all." Members of the eight-member Census Monitoring Board also reacted to the ESCAP recommendation and subsequent decision by Secretary Evans. Dr. Everett Ehrlich, one of four members appointed by President Clinton, said the Secretary "has chosen to overlook" the expert committee's statement that it ran out of time to complete its evaluation. He pointed to research conducted by Dr. Jeffrey Passel at the request of the Board's Presidential appointees, which explained the discrepancy between the Demographic Analysis estimate, the Census 2000 data, and the A.C.E. results. Dr. Passel's analysis is available through the Presidential Members web site at www.cmbp.gov. Kenneth Blackwell, co-chair of the Monitoring Board for the members appointed by the congressional Republican leadership, called the ESCAP recommendation "the right decision." He pointed to a study of the 1990 adjustment methodology commissioned by the Board's congressional appointees that "reinforced our concerns that statistical adjustment would not accomplish much of what its supporters were promising." Board Member A. ark Neuman credited the Census 2000 advertising campaign, high mail-back rate, and nearly $7 billion appropriation for "a dramatic reduction in the differential undercount." The Congressional Members web site is www.cmbc.gov. Legal challenges surrounding use of scientific sampling continue: Los Angeles City Attorney Jim Hahn pressed forward with the city's challenge to the decision to release unadjusted census numbers for redistricting. The city amended its pending lawsuit against Secretary Evans' revocation and revision last month of a federal rule giving the Census Bureau director final say over whether to release statistically adjusted data. Los Angeles, joined by several other counties, cities, and local officials, filed its original legal challenge on February 21, claiming that the Secretary violated the Administrative Procedures Act by not providing for a 'notice and comment period' before rescinding the original rule, which also would have required the Census Bureau to release statistically corrected census figures even if the agency's director decided against an adjustment. A federal district court judge refused to grant a temporary restraining order against the new Commerce Department rule and scheduled a March 5th hearing to consider Los Angeles' request for a preliminary injunction to stop the rule from taking effect while the court considered the merits of the case. The plaintiffs dropped their request for a preliminary injunction in order to review the ESCAP's report and recommendation against releasing adjusted numbers for redistricting. The amended complaint, filed on March 12, alleges that the Commerce Secretary's decision to issue unadjusted numbers violates a Census Act requirement to use "sampling" methods, "if he considers it feasible," in compiling data for purposes other than congressional apportionment. We believe that the Census Act creates a presumption that corrected census data shall be used for all non-reapportionment purposes if there is a finding by the Commerce Secretary that the use is feasible," Mr. Hahn said in a written statement. Former Secretary William Daley concluded last year that statistical sampling methods were feasible, Mr. Hahn noted, "and nothing that the Commerce Secretary has said since then refutes that finding." Pointing to the Census Bureau's conclusion that it had run out of time to resolve concerns about the A.C.E. estimates, Mr. Hahn said the April 1st deadline for transmitting redistricting data to the states was "merely a procedural matter" not mandated by the Constitution. "[T]here is simply too much at stake to allow an artificial deadline to stand in the way of the most accurate census possible," he concluded. Joining Los Angeles in its renewed legal effort are Los Angeles County; the cities of San Francisco, San Jose, Inglewood, and Santa Clara in California, Stamford (CT), San Antonio (TX), Albuquerque (NM), and Toledo (OH); the New York City boroughs of Brooklyn and the Bronx; several Los Angeles City Council members; California Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante; the New York City Council and its Speaker, and the Bronx and Manhattan Borough Presidents; and Toledo Mayor Carleton Finkbeiner. Census Bureau starts sending redistricting data to the states: By law, the Census Bureau must release block level population counts to the states within one year of Census Day, which is set by law as April 1. (The issuance of redistricting data is required by title 13, United States Code, section 141(c)). The detailed data includes information on race and Hispanic origin, and the voting age population (18 and over), to facilitate the process of redrawing congressional and state legislative districts in accordance with the Constitution's equal representation clause and the federal Voting Rights Act. The Census Bureau is releasing the block level data to the states this month on a flow basis; data for New Jersey and Virginia were the first to be released last Thursday. The data is available to the public through the Bureau's American FactFinder at www.factfinder.census.gov. The Bureau said the new data delivery system will allow it "to disseminate more data to more users faster than in 1990," when 90 percent of the census results were issued in print form. Questions about the information contained in this News Alert may be directed to Terri Ann Lowenthal at 202/484-2270 or, by e-mail at mailto:terriann2k(a)aol.com. For copies of previous News Alerts and other information, use our web site www.census2000.org. Please direct all requests to receive News Alerts, and all changes in address/phone/fax/e-mail, to the Census 2000 Initiative at mailto:Census2000(a)ccmc.org or 202/326-8700. Please feel free to circulate this information to colleagues and other interested individuals.

24 years, 4 months

[CTPP] How to transfer population counts released from 2000 census to your TAZs.

by Nanda Srinivasan

The Redistricting files are being released on a state by state basis by the Census Bureau. These files contain total population by race and latino origin, and population over the age of 18 by race and latino origin. The website is: http://www.census.gov/clo/www/redistricting.html. The data are released at block level. However, the geographic header includes a TAZ code, so that we can aggregate the data to a TAZ level. I tried to download the data, transfer them to a GIS, and aggregate the data to a TAZ level for a county, and state. I worked on Windows NT, however the process should work on Windows 95, 98, or 2000. For unix users, I have a small note at the bottom. Please note that this is *a* method. There may be far better methods than this. If you know of any other methods, or have written code to automate the transfer, please let us know. Here are some general steps in a PC environment: There are three files that need to be FTPed from the site for each state. I attempted to convert their files to a GIS Platform, specifically Arcview. 1. For any county or state download the shape file for block data from ESRI's website (http://www.geographynetwork.com/data/tiger2000/). Unzip these files, and keep them in a specially created folder. I created a folder called d:\VA_PL_Data, and saved the extracted shape files as 2000blocks.shp. 2. FTP the three redistricting files from the CB ftp site at http://www2.census.gov/census_2000/datasets/redistricting_file--pl_94-171/ 3. For example, for virginia, the geographic header file is vageo.upl.zip, and the data files are va00001.upl.zip and va00002.upl.zip The files need a bit of massaging before import to Arcview. Step a: The geographic header file is a flat ASCII file. The fields most of us are interested in are: 1. The State and County FIPS. 2. The Tract 3. The Block 4. The TAZ To convert the flat file into something that can be used for linking fields, you will need to know where (or at which character) a record/field begins and ends. This can be obtained in chapter 2 (pages 16,17,18,19,20,21,22) of the file layout document (http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/pl94-171.pdf). For example: You can open the file in MS Access and specify exactly the 18th marker to the 25 marker for the "logical record" which is the key between the geographic header file and the data files. The State and county FIPS are between the 29 and 34 markers. The Tract is between the 55 and 61 marker. (Meaning that the record begins at 56 and is of 6 characters, so it ends at 61). The block is between the 63 marker and the 67 marker. The TAZ is between the 347th marker and the 353 marker. Once the table is imported into Access, save it as a dbf file for import into Arcview. I called the geography file as va_geography.dbf and saved it in the folder d:\VA_PL_Data Step b. The data files are fairly straightforward to convert as they are comma delimited. va00001.upl.zip: The file contains total population by race, and hispanic origin, and is in a convenient .csv format, and can be easily imported to access and converted to a dbf. The first field in this file is the "logical record key" - a field you can use for connecting the data with the geographic dbase file developed in step a. I named the data file as va_totalcounts.dbf and saved it in and saved it in the folder d:\VA_PL_Data. va00002.upl.zip contains voting population (Age > 18) and is formatted in the same way as va00001.upl.zip. You can import these into access and give them some headers that are more recognizable for you. Export these as DBF too. Step 4: a. Open a new Arcview session, and add the block theme you downloaded in step 1 (in my case 2000blocks.shp) as a theme. Also, add the three tables developed in Step 3. You will notice you can "join" the geographic header file and the data files easily in Arcview. I needed only total population counts by race, so I had only two tables to join (va_geography.dbf, and va_totalcounts.dbf). I used "logical record field" as the key field to join the two tables. b. However, the block theme obtained in step 1 (2000blocks.shp) has an attribute table where the state fips, county fips, tract, and block number are concatenated into a single field. So to join the shape file to the data file, we need to concatenate the fields containing the statefips, countyfips, tract, and block in the new va_totalcounts.pdf obtained in step 4a. This can be then connected to the corresponding field in "Attributes of 2000blocks.shp" Once the data are in Arcview, you can turn on the geo-processing wizard and summarzie the data by TAZ, or by Tract easily. File- extensions- click on geoprocessing wizard. Then go to view and dissolve the block shape file on TAZ, Tract or anything else. This is the reason I added TAZ as an import item in step 3. You can add other fields you are interested in summation, or geography. UNIX Users: You can follow most of the steps outlined for PC users. You may have to save your files as comma delimited and import them as .txt files into Arcview. The steps that used Microsoft Access are basically far easier in a UNIX environment. For example, for the geographic header file, you can use shell scripts or simple "cut" and "paste" commands specifying the exact start and end points for fields (obtained from the file layout manual). The rest of the process must work. Thank you! Nanda Srinivasan 202-366-5021

24 years, 4 months

[CTPP] Census 2000 PL 94-171 tentative release schedule

by Chuck Purvis

TO CTPP-News listserv recipients Census data users may be interested in knowing the Census Bureau's tentative schedule for releasing PL 94-171 for the next couple of weeks. Users may want to bookmark the following page as a fairly quick gateway for obtaining redistricting (PL 94-171) data files: http://www.census.gov/clo/www/redistricting.html In particular, users may want to bookmark the FTP site where the raw data files can be downloaded: http://ftp2.census.gov/census_2000/datasets/ "Power users" who may be using SAS to process the files should note that the State Data Center network is sharing SAS input code on their site at: http://www.sdcbidc.iupui.edu/ In terms of TIGER files, all TIGER/Line Redistricting 2000 files are available (except Puerto Rico) at: http://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/rd_2ktiger/tgr2kweb.html ESRI has converted all TIGER files into their proprietary "shape" file format, and are offering all converted TIGER files for free at: http://www.geographynetwork.com/data/tiger2000/ And lastly, UC Berkeley has some TIGER 2000 map layers available for California in three different formats (ArcView, Maptitude and MapInfo) available in two geographic projections (NAD 1927 and NAD 1983). A very nice arrangement for providing data files to external users: http://swdb.berkeley.edu/geography.html cheers, Chuck Purvis, MTC ********************************************************** Data Tentatively Scheduled for Release Week of March 5* Arkansas Indiana Louisiana Mississippi New Jersey Pennsylvania South Dakota Texas Vermont Virginia Wisconsin Data Tentatively Scheduled for Release Week of March 12* Alabama Alaska Delaware Hawaii Illinois Kansas Missouri Nebraska Nevada New York Ohio Oklahoma *The release dates are subject to change due to uncertainties in processing. This means that states tentatively scheduled for release may be delayed and states not listed could be released without notice. ************************************************************* ******************************************************* e-mail: cpurvis(a)mtc.ca.gov Chuck Purvis, AICP Senior Transportation Planner/Analyst, Planning Section Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street, Oakland, CA 94607-4700 (510) 464-7731 (voice) (510) 464-7848 (fax) WWW: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/ MTC DataMart: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/datamart/ MTC FTP Site: ftp://ftp.abag.ca.gov/pub/mtc/planning/ *******************************************************

24 years, 4 months

[CTPP] Census Question on Departure Time

by Chuck Purvis

TO: CTPP-News and TMIP Listservs FR: Chuck Purvis, MTC RE: U.S. Census Question on Departure Time from Home-to-Work I want to thank folks for the 23 detailed responses to our 2/16/01 inquiry regarding the American Community Survey (ACS) question on departure time from home-to-work. I have compiled these detailed responses on a WWW page at our TRB urban data committee web site: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/trb/urban/departure.htm This web page prints out about 8 pages. Generally speaking, the majority of the responses strongly favor retaining the departure time from home-to-work on the upcoming American Community Survey. We will use this information as background for a committee white paper on departure time. Please e-mail me at cpurvis(a)mtc.ca.gov if any further questions or comments. Chuck Purvis, MTC ******************************************************* e-mail: cpurvis(a)mtc.ca.gov Chuck Purvis, AICP Senior Transportation Planner/Analyst, Planning Section Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street, Oakland, CA 94607-4700 (510) 464-7731 (voice) (510) 464-7848 (fax) WWW: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/ MTC DataMart: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/datamart/ MTC FTP Site: ftp://ftp.abag.ca.gov/pub/mtc/planning/ *******************************************************

24 years, 4 months

Re: [CTPP] A question on combining NPTS and Census Data

by Liss

Hello Elif, FHWA Planning developed a report on how to convert the "usual/last week" data from CTPP to a "yesterday" measure typically used in household travel surveys. The report uses NPTS to do the conversion, so I would imagine it would be a useful source for you. I believe the name of the report is "Conversion Factors for CTPP Data" or something like that. I would contact Sheldon Edner at 202-366-4066 or someone on his team. I believe his email is sheldon.edner(a)fhwa.dot.gov, and I am copying him on this. Susan Liss 202-366-5060 >>> ekarsi(a)usc.edu 02/26/01 10:16PM >>> Hi all, I'm interested in combining npts and census data for 1990. Can anyone direct me to studies or sources on this? studies that have done this or sources that explain how to do it- I appreciate your input. Elif School of Policy, Planning and Development University of Southern California On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Hoekstra, Jay wrote: > Will the data fields for Stf 1, data by block level, be the same as they > were in the 1990 census? Or can anyone tell me where to find out. I have > looked through the Census web site. >

24 years, 5 months

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

CTPP March 2001